Thread: Разные мысли и соображения вокруг событий в Украине

Well, after just listening Putin's speech I must agree with Merkel's statement that he has lost a touch with reality. Despite he mostly told things I can agree with, he desided to play fool with "Crimean self-defence forces". Also those childish excuses "Look what USA did in Serbia, Iraq and Libya!". Damn, I'm ashamed of his actions.

I caught a bit of it. I think he was being his usual self. Some of it right, some of it funny/showy and some just cryptical or nonsensical. Plus a slight air of superiority, he thinks he's about 10 times smarter than the journalists, and it shows.....

But according to him, NOTHING has happened from a Russian perspective, and Russia will not annex or otherwise take over Crimea. He said:

• No Russian forces crossed any borders apart from soldiers legitimately transiting to the Sevastopol base according to the contract.
• The number of Russian solders on Crimea is within the terms of the contract for the base....
• Definitely no tanks involved, and
• any action at the border with Ukraine was pure co-incidence due to a random military exercise.... yes, sure... what are the odds of that.
• He denied any knowledge of the special forces type soldiers with "no insignia" that turned up in Crimea and said that anyone can buy a uniform in a shop. Too silly! He should have just said "Unable to comment".

I totally believed it when European media they said Russia was sending soldiers to Krim.

Originally Posted by Basil77

Well, after just listening Putin's speech I must agree with Merkel's statement that he has lost a touch with reality. Despite he mostly told things I can agree with, he desided to play fool with "Crimean self-defence forces". Also those childish excuses "Look what USA did in Serbia, Iraq and Libya!". Damn, I'm ashamed of his actions.

He took what he wanted to, the rest is a diplomacy: I know that I lie and you know that I lie but you can pretend to believe me and keep your face. This kind of game is always payed at all levels but usually not so bluntly. Surprizingly I have a feeling that some time ago he was sequentially avoiding direct lie even in public statements. Now he abandoned that manner. Probably he believes that won something really important. I don't see what exactly.

I don't understand why you say he lost touch with reality? I think he's being the same as he always is. A bit weird but with some punchlines here and there. Avoiding all difficult questions, like politicians always do.

Losing touch with reality would be saying "Yippi, finally a hafway legitimate chance to get Crimea back, let's go and "liberate" it and to heck with the West and lunatics in Kiev... and let's pick up a few cities in West Ukraine on the way there."

That's essentially what the Western media is portraying that he did, even though it actually hasn't happened.

Maybe I am less critical of him because I don't have to live in a country ruled by him... or because I like some aspects of his style.

Originally Posted by Hanna

I don't understand why you say he lost touch with reality? I think he's being the same as he always is. A bit weird but with some punchlines here and there. Avoiding all difficult questions, like politicians always do.

Losing touch with reality would be saying "Yippi, finally a hafway legitimate chance to get Crimea back, let's go and "liberate" it and to heck with the West and lunatics in Kiev... and let's pick up a few cities in West Ukraine on the way there."

That's essentially what the Western media is portraying that he did, even though it actually hasn't happened.

Maybe I am less critical of him because I don't have to live in a country ruled by him... or because I like some aspects of his style.

Because as far I remember it's the first time he gave order that directly contradicts with international laws (to surround and disarm Ukrainian military bases in Crimea). Also direct lie about it was done by "Crimean self-defence forces". After doing this he has no moral right to say that Russian government always follow international laws and agreements. What a shame.

Originally Posted by Basil77

Also direct lie about it was done by "Crimean self-defence forces".

Why should he confess when noone forces him?

Originally Posted by Basil77

After doing this he has no moral right to say that Russian government always follow international laws and agreements. What a shame.

He is politician, he's not a priest.

Originally Posted by Basil77

he gave order that directly contradicts with international laws (to surround and disarm Ukrainian military bases in Crimea).

Like there's any proof that he did.

Originally Posted by dtrq

Like there's any proof that he did.

He is supreme commander of Russian military forces. "The polite armed guys" obviously belong to Russian military. No way any military commander can take such actions without highest order. Who are they? Some private contract army? I can understand the point why he is doing this. USA and European politicans acts with no less hypocrisy when talking about "peaceful protesters", denouncing the agreement that were signed by Polish, French and German foreign ministers and thousand other things. Putin acts like "it's a game of lies that can be played from both sides". The grave difference is that from Russian side there is direct military involvement and seems like Putin don't understand it's not the same thing.

Оскандалился таки Путин в полной мере. Стыдно за него.

Originally Posted by Lampada

Оскандалился таки Путин в полной мере. Стыдно за него.

Чья бы корова мычала, а вот Геннадия Викторовича бы молчала:

Геннадий Балашов в своем интервью отметил, что революция в Украине это тренировка для революции в России по сбросу диктаторского режима Владимира Путина.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Well, you don't really follow the situation, don't you? The government is temporary, not elected, the elections are coming soon, Julia don't enter the temporary government and there is no way in contemporary Ukraine to be poor and independent in the same time. It is still to be made.

You feel ready for conclusions?

BTW if you don't accept legitimity of even moderately rich people and money-consuming elections, than you should not accept legitimity of any USA president.

Bullshit. I think what Hanna quotes is right, in this case. I read the same info from RT. I don't trust it fully as a source but the facts are these Ukrainian 'businessmen' are more of the same. They have a Jewish central banker as interim PM. Do you think these personnel in the Government will change much after an 'election?' Didn't you listen to the Nuland recording? They already decided who they want or don't care for (i.e. smaller governor or other appointee positions that are insignificant to them). Then, they pacify the electorate with 15-30 or whatever amount they choose-billion dollar IMF loan and promises of jobs and BS, BS and more BS.... same shit as before but a different pile.

I'm very disappointed that Ukrainians haven't seen through this but I guess when you are already oppressed and are poor for a long time, it's easy to turn screws and manipulate things.

"BTW if you don't accept legitimity of even moderately rich people and money-consuming elections, than you should not accept legitimity of any USA president."
Many Americans know there is a problem about that. Also, they often criticize lobbies and other intrusive operations. So, that is the point. This is going to be yet another corrupt and shady 'democracy.' Ukraine is not independent, STILL.

Не, раз вы не унимаетесь, тогда вот вам тоже порция:

Lol, Гоблин красавчик. Очень красиво всё разложил по полочкам. Я бы только ещё ткнул носом в дерьмо Российский МИД и СВР, за то что прокакали ситуацию на Украине.

Putin acts like "it's a game of lies that can be played from both sides". The grave difference is that from Russian side there is direct military involvement and seems like Putin don't understand it's not the same thing.

He understands everything.The reality is as follows: Putin is driven by global perspective as the gatherer of the Russian lands and his logic is very close to the maxim “the end justifies the means”. Laws, sanctions, isolation, etc. are all temporary things, but the Crimea is to be Russian for generations to come. So, people, economy, army are just chess pieces in the game and really don’t matter too much. I can probably quote some nice Nekrasov’s lines to show what we should expect.

[Pусский народ]
Вынесет все - и широкую, ясную
Грудью дорогу проложит себе.
Жаль только - жить в эту пору прекрасную
Уж не придется - ни мне, ни тебе....

Originally Posted by Hanna

Crocodile as well.

Well... there is so much controversy surrounding the crisis.. I can only serve my personal opinion, so please add the missing "IMHO" wherever missing.

First, if asked with whom I side: Ukraine of Russia, I would say I side with both or neither, since I believe there is no fundamental issue between Russia and Ukraine. How come? I believe there is a fundamental economical issue between Russia and EU and there is a fundamental military issue between Russia and NATO. And Ukraine has accidently become a battlefield. Military-wise, Russia cannot afford Ukraine becoming a NATO member. It is rightly assumed by Russia that after Ukraine becoming a EU member, the next very logical step for Ukraine would be joining NATO.

Here's why. Ukraine consists of three major regions: the Western Ukraine, the Eastern Ukraine, and the Crimea. Each of those regions are geographically, historically, culturally, economically, and to some extent ethnically are distinct entities. Among the three, the Crimea is the least influential and virtually has no say in Ukrainian affairs. The Eastern and the Western regions like each other like a cat and a dog. The only reason they are together is the strong common fear of Russia - the political, cultural, and economical fear to become yet again just a province or a dominion of Russia. Today Ukrainians feel like they're the first-class citizens of their own country, and they felt they were second-class citizens when they were part of Russia. As a result, a typical fight between the Western and the Eastern regions would sum up in something like: "[...] and it is so great we are not in Russia where there is no A, B, and C, so we can freely do X, Y, and Z; something that Russian citizens are being deprived of! Poor Russians.. they must be envying us right now.. they just can't admit it because of their unfulfilled imperial ambitions!"

And now about the imperial ambitions. Both Western and Eastern Ukraine unite when it comes to their imperial relationship with Crimea. On a paper, Crimea has a proud status of "Autonomous Republic", so Crimea has their own Parliament, Government, flag, and anthem. In reality, the power of all those proud Parliament and Government is just enough to elect, say, a teacher of the year, or make a decision whether to improve the plumbing between two cities this year or next year.. At most, they have a power of a municipality. And, obviously, they would very much be delighted to get more power. What for?
For example, to sort out the legal issues related to the illegitimate seizures of the public real estate and converting it to the private property by some Crimean Tatars. Everybody agrees it is illegal, however neither the Crimean courts, nor the proud Parliament and Government could do anything about that. Only the power of Kiev could enforce the law in Crimea. The issue remains in active status for decades and Kiev deliberately does not want to take any legal actions against the Crimean Tatars. Why?

Because, the Crimea is mostly populated by Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians. Crimean Tatars, once the native people of Crimea, were deported en mass in 1944 and were only allowed to come back in 1991. Only about half of the Crimean Tatars repatriated from the Central Asia, and those were politically active individuals determined to resettle and fight all the obstacles [in the form of the aforementioned Russian and Ukrainians]. The central power in Kiev deliberately dimishes the power of Crimeans by the old 'divide and conquer' principle: the Crimean Tatars are minority and are no danger to the Ukrainians affairs, and the Tatars are excellent tool of battling any 'Russian' in Crimea.

For example, if a couple of Russians collect some money and build a memorial cross, immediately thousands of Crimean Tatars gather to demolish that cross and engage in the physical fight with Russians. Eventually, the [now ill-famed] Berkut groups are called to beat Russians [and restore the order].

Another reason Crimeans en mass are not happy to be with Ukraine is the so-called 'Ukrainization' - the enforcement of Ukrainian language as the only official language. The only rationale given to the Russian-speaking communities is something like: "What a shame! You can't learn a language of the country you live in? If you're living in France, study French," totally ingoring the fact that people were born here and never left their homeland to start with, and the new state with the new rules fell upon them forcefully. Why is that a problem to recognize Russian as a second official language of Ukraine is a mystery to me. There are many countries in the world where more than one official language is recognized and that promotes the tolerance between the various ethnic groups. No explanation is given except for the cultural fear of Russia: it is assumed that people would stop speaking Ukrainian if Russian becomes the second language.

That was a background which is necessary to understand the recent events.

So, recently there has been two rude attempts to interfere in the interior Ukrainian politics.

First, the sudden financial sanctions imposed by the EU against the selected individuals (whom the EU unilaterally made responsible for the bloodshed in Kiev) caused the technicall collapse of the Ukrainian government and enforced locally by the 'self-defence forces'. Among the rest, the temporary government declared the legitimacy of the ideological purges and the legal prosecution of whoever was involved with the previous 'criminal' power. And the roster of those 'whoever' was kindly supplied by the 'self-defence forces' - it was peacefully floating near the vacated President residence. Alas, not all documents were saved, some were burned and could not be recovered. Obviously, some pages of the saved documents were missing (=drowned or destroyed by water), but the other documents were perfectly intact and the roster of criminals to be purged was ready. Obviously, if that roster was, by a pure accident, incomplete, theoretically a dozen or more pages could be added (but they should have been put into water for a couple of minutes first, just to become more authentic) with little effort. Victoria to the Western Ukraine and the EU (and NATO just a few year later)! And whilst the country was unsure what is going on and what is going to happen next, the Crimean Tatars turned (thousands of them!) to be very supportive of the 'new government' right away. Right away were they demanding the dissmissal of the present Crimean Government and the Parliament (and demostrating their determination to use the force if necessary), asking only one small thing in return for their selfless democratic support - a better represenation of Crimean Tatars in the Crimean Parliament. (SURPRIZE!) The first and obvious consequence of that, should that better representation happen, would obviously be the legalization of the illegal land seizures. (O_o..)

Then, the second rude attempt to interfere in the interior Ukrainian politics had occured - the occupation of Crimea by the untagged uniformed armed forces. The order was restored right away in Crimea and the Tatars became as peaceful and as politically unengaged as possible. And it was obvious right from the start those armed forces are Russian, so why the masquarade? Because, there is HUGE difference between the OCCUPATION and the ANNEXATION according to the international law. (Say 'Hi' to Israel and their practices.) Russian forces in Crimea are not there to stay, but to leave restoring the previous balance of power between the Eastern and the Western regions, keeping the EU and NATO away, and not letting the bloodshed in Crimea. Yes, the potential bloodshed is not from the legendary Bandera forces, but from the very real Crimean Tatars with the approval from the 'renewed and cleansed' central power from Kiev. Where would be Berkut to stop the violence in Crimea?
Now, both Russia and EU/US are throwing as many pieces as they can on the negotiation table. There should be as many as possible just to be able to exchange piece for piece and hopefully gain something in the end.. Strong negotiation skills, yay!

So, I think for an extra week or so there would be more pieces put on the table and in the subsequent two weeks the balance of power would be restored to what it was.

Hmm.. how was I able to put down so many letters?

При том, что Гоблина вряд ли можно рекомендовать кому бы то ни было в качестве морального или интеллектуального авторитета, мне представляется что он не так прост, как кажется, и основным содержанием его выступлений (как и, например, пресловутого мистера Фримена) является сценический образ "дятел в белом", а отнюдь не то, что по форме может показаться "мнением" или "анализом". В самом деле, во все свои полчаса он ухитрился не озвучить вообще ни одного намека на что-либо оригинальное, как если бы старательно этого избегал. Этот его сценический образ, фактически, является пародией на мировоззрение 95% российск постсоветской (каюсь, сам грешен) "думающей прослойки" и примкнувших к ней пользователей сетевых устройств. Мировоззрение такое: "я - самодостаточная мыслящая личность, не подверженная пропаганде, и знаю, что все является дерьмом. Я в этом дерьме разбираюсь и имею компетентное резко негативное мнение по любому из его сортов, однако в тактильный контакт не вступаю, а нахожусь сверху весь в белом". Это мировоззрение избавляет от проработки собственных нравственных оценок, заменяя их на универсальный шаблон, дает неповторимое чувство собственной значимости, но не помогает на практическом уровне ориентироваться в чем бы то ни было, исключает носителя из любой социальной активности и, при достаточно широкой распространенности, делает общество импотентным.

Лермонтов - наше все++.

Крок, TL;DR. Есть в твоем выступлении что-то, что я не охватил своей тирадой?

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Крок, TL;DR.

Ну, я уже попросил прощение за многабукаф соответствующим смайликом. Я писал ответ для Ханны, у которой совсем нет контекста, остальным мой рулон вряд ли покажется чем-то заслуживающим внимания. Дисклеймер имеется.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Есть в твоем выступлении что-то, что я не охватил своей тирадой?

Трудно сказать.. Я уже тут на форуме 100500 раз высказывал своё убеждение, что все мы - жертвы промывания мозгов, и рептилии ничуть не исключение из правила. Ханна спросила моё представление о ситуации, я ответил. Дисклеймер честно написал. Думаешь, Ханна воспримет моё мнение как руководство к действию? До сих пор она вообще никогда со мной не соглашалась.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Это мировоззрение избавляет от проработки собственных нравственных оценок

Нравственных оценок? Ты издеваешься или серьёзно? И кто же в этой истории поступил нравственно? Может, те, кто бутылки с зажигательной смесью бросали в простых 18-летних парней из Беркута? Вот Комаровский выступает и говорит про 18-летних ребят. А кто же такие Беркут? Не те ли, кого также растили с учётом рекомендаций Комаровского? Какая нах там у вас нравственность происходит?

/* Уполз перечитывать "По ком звонит колокол" в поисках нравственных оценок.. */

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Нравственных оценок? Ты издеваешься или серьёзно? И кто же в этой истории поступил нравственно? Может, те, кто бутылки с зажигательной смесью бросали в простых 18-летних парней из Беркута? Вот Комаровский выступает и говорит про 18-летних ребят. А кто же такие Беркут? Не те ли, кого также растили с учётом рекомендаций Комаровского? Какая нах там у вас нравственность происходит?

/* Уполз перечитывать "По ком звонит колокол" в поисках нравственных оценок.. */

При чем здесь "у нас"? Нравственность - в глазах смотрящего. А результат должен быть - "кто виноват и что делать лично тебе" или на крайняк "что бы сделал лично ты".

А насчет беркута - я согласен. Большей частью просто выполняли свой долг. Тем паче, что снайперы, действительно, вряд ли были беркутовские, как и убийства с вывозами. Но я и не думаю, что им грозит что-то более серьезное, чем расформирование. Никто их на фонарях развешивать и не собирался и не собирается. Покричат и успокоятся. Не Россия-съ. Даже не факт, что должностные льготы и стаж отберут. Если и будут дела то конкретные - типа превышение тем, кто задержанного раздел догола, гонял по снегу и записывал это на видео.

Ладно, кто там кого гасил на Майдане оставим для следствия (надеюсь, что оно будет объективным).
По факту, скажите, законы против русского языка принимались или нет? "Москалей на ножи" переодетые русские провокаторы кричали? Я готов охотно поверить, что на майдане были и т. н. "вменяемые" люди. Но уж простите, с теми, кто принимал подобные законы, кто на заседание Рады с автоматом приходит, кто кричит "кого угодно на ножи", я не то что на одну площадь не выйду, я в одном поле, простите посрать не сяду.

Истерию, которая поднялась после этого в России, можно очень даже понять. Вон в Москве в 2011 году тоже прозападные либерасты на марш вместе с нациками вышли. Ничего так, органично толпа смотрелась.